I'm glad the show is gone, its title didn't represent the show's content.
I saw Maher on Leno several, several months ago and he behaved as described above. He was angry, bitter and completely incapable of taking Leno's barbs and rolling with them. He was surly and belicose.
My first thought was "Isn't this guy supposed to be a comedian? Why is he so adamant and whiney about everything??"
I was completely unimpressed with Politically Incorrect when it arrived on ABC and couldn't switch the channel fast enough on the occasions that I wandered onto it by accident.
I won't miss him and his belicosity, but I will wish him much good luck on finding happiness and tolerance for others one day. The way that he's been acting, I think that perhaps somebody should watch after him...get him involved in some clubs. He seems the sort to be self-destructive. I hope he finds peace somewhere.
There is nothing new about suicide killers. Think kamikaze.
Bravery is acting to help others without thought for yourself; their entire motivation was selfish. *They* get to kill the infidel and *they* get to go to heaven and get virgins for eternity.
[quote]<strong>The immediate reaction of America was to paint these criminals as cowards. So very trite, so self servingly propagandist, but so very true. I wonder if Americans had in that moment reasoned themselves to the right conclusion or simply searched for the most demeaning slander they could muster and luckily found the right target. I tend to think that the label 'coward' was a Hail Mary pass that just happened to be right on the mark. Sometimes you get lucky.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because, God knows, if Americans get something right it must have been by luck.
I think that's the dumbest thing I've read today.
[quote]<strong>But going back to the my first paragraph, I have to wonder if 'coward' does any good as an operational tag? We expect cowards to protect themselves...</strong><hr></blockquote>
They were protecting themselves. Eternal utopia > life on Earth.
You seem to leave out that key point. Do you think these guys would've done it without that promise? If so, why the hell did they talk about it so much?
[quote]<strong>Only he didn't think through it completely and he suffered when he wavered. You have to be sure of your opinion before you give it, and he wasn't sure because he wasn't sure if he was trying to be funny or serious, and neither was anybody else.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maher made his living off of crap like this and he got burned. He's so busy burning everyone else in effigy he whines like a pansy when the tables turn? What bullshit.
If Maher can't think of the right thing to say then he's lost his purpose.
Who owed Maher a television show? I don't see "Corporations shall not infringe on your right to have your own television show" in the bill of rights.
[quote]<strong>but the rest of his pro-Americana critics have failed in roughly the same way and their reaction has been at least as embarrasing as Maher's comedic or editorial failings.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>The immediate reaction of America was to paint these criminals as cowards. So very trite, so self servingly propagandist, but so very true.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just goes to show that bravery and goodness are not in any way linked, just like criminality and cowardice aren't. Congratulations, you're a brave man, just an evil criminal, corrupt to the core of your hateful being.
I saw Bill Maher on Larry King. What a bitter loser. He may have a point to make here or there but when you start by insulting everyone that watchs your show .....
I don't think that you're wrong grover, or that America is wrong, but at some point you must agree that the attitude is a counterproductive one. Morally, I give full credit to that qualification, "coward", but it serves little practical purpose to extrapolate to higher realms. They might be doing it because they've fully surrendered to the myth of their own eternity (to protect themselves), or they might be doing it because they believe it is the best way fight for their people (to protect/avenge their families). Both reasons are mad, if not cowardly, and we can be reasonably certain that it is the first motivation that spurred them, but where does that get us? A reaffirmed sense of moral superiority?
The scale and the impact of 9-11 has not been equalled in American history, it was something new for the American citizen. Kamikaze is a different beast. Those were soldiers at war with other soldiers. The pressures put on them to preform their 'duty' (most of them young boys) was , I'd venture a guess, deployed against a much greater will to survive. Ghastly, but a little different than situation of the suicide pilots of 9-11 or the bombers of Isreal.
Eternal life? yes yes yes, I see the argument completely, I agree with it, but we suffer what they do in this life. It doesn't matter to me that they are victims of their own psychology. I would rather confine my thinking to this realm, and in this realm Americans are faced with a very new threat. Platitudes about bravery and morality etc etc mean very little to me.
Domestically, those platitudes are what you have been offered in the place of real action. It should worry you (Americans) but it generally does not. Twice that I can think of, BUsh has urged peope to fly? Once almost immeadiately after 9-11. Why should we "do as we have done"? You can get on a human missile if you want, I think I'll avoid tall buildings, thanks. Security? The failings, gross failings, of the airline industry have been comletely glossed over in the time since 9-11. Even victim compensation stipulates that one waive all future legal action against the airline industry. Why? So we can go on as we have always done? Because they're cowards and we're not? That is poor, and dangerous, rationale, and it repeats itself everywhere. Security at major events is again become nothing more than a token gesture, and the stamina to maintain rigorous control of immigration and naturalization is already fading.
What Maher said was not well though out, but I choose to give it its best possible light. There is a frightening collision between truth and propaganda at work, or there was, and it was hard to see for most because the essential argument was true, they are cowards, but was deployed -- unconsciously, I hope -- as a defence mechanism. We do not need psychological defence, we need real defence.
<strong>There is nothing new about suicide killers...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah. I don't think anybody was laboring under that illusion.
[quote]<strong>Bravery is acting to help others without thought for yourself; their entire motivation was selfish. *They* get to kill the infidel and *they* get to go to heaven and get virgins for eternity.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
True, but it's one thing to believe that. It's another thing to act on that belief. It doesn't lessen my utter contempt for the 9/11 terrorists just because I withhold from using one particular insult against them.
politically incorrect was a watershed mark in recent broadcasting history. it brought real discussion of real topics into real americans living rooms in the only way that is digestible to the masses, with a bit of a humor.
it certainly wasn't perfect an bill maher definitely has his hang ups but it was one of very few shows that i actually found memorable.
<strong>politically incorrect was a watershed mark in recent broadcasting history. it brought real discussion of real topics into real americans living rooms in the only way that is digestible to the masses, with a bit of a humor.
it certainly wasn't perfect an bill maher definitely has his hang ups but it was one of very few shows that i actually found memorable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it didn't. It brought yet more phonies in front of the cameras to talk about things they know little about.
Dennis Miller, though arrogant, is much more intelligent and a more astute social and political observer than Maher ever was. But, people like to hate Miller because he wears his admittedly verbose ego on his shoulder.
[I heard] more intelligent questions and dead-on biting commentary from Dennis Miller on HBO (pick any three episodes) than the two dozen or more Politically Incorrect shows I watched over the years. Maher's mistake was that he let too many backwards ass people onto his show so he would have someone to lampoon all the time. It wreaked of a setup.
Instead, he should've just had one intelligent guest who could speak to the issues one way or another. Whether Maher agreed with him / her or not.
Comments
I saw Maher on Leno several, several months ago and he behaved as described above. He was angry, bitter and completely incapable of taking Leno's barbs and rolling with them. He was surly and belicose.
My first thought was "Isn't this guy supposed to be a comedian? Why is he so adamant and whiney about everything??"
I was completely unimpressed with Politically Incorrect when it arrived on ABC and couldn't switch the channel fast enough on the occasions that I wandered onto it by accident.
I won't miss him and his belicosity, but I will wish him much good luck on finding happiness and tolerance for others one day. The way that he's been acting, I think that perhaps somebody should watch after him...get him involved in some clubs. He seems the sort to be self-destructive. I hope he finds peace somewhere.
D
[ 11-01-2002: Message edited by: curiousuburb ]</p>
Bravery is acting to help others without thought for yourself; their entire motivation was selfish. *They* get to kill the infidel and *they* get to go to heaven and get virgins for eternity.
[quote]<strong>The immediate reaction of America was to paint these criminals as cowards. So very trite, so self servingly propagandist, but so very true. I wonder if Americans had in that moment reasoned themselves to the right conclusion or simply searched for the most demeaning slander they could muster and luckily found the right target. I tend to think that the label 'coward' was a Hail Mary pass that just happened to be right on the mark. Sometimes you get lucky.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because, God knows, if Americans get something right it must have been by luck.
I think that's the dumbest thing I've read today.
[quote]<strong>But going back to the my first paragraph, I have to wonder if 'coward' does any good as an operational tag? We expect cowards to protect themselves...</strong><hr></blockquote>
They were protecting themselves. Eternal utopia > life on Earth.
You seem to leave out that key point. Do you think these guys would've done it without that promise? If so, why the hell did they talk about it so much?
[quote]<strong>Only he didn't think through it completely and he suffered when he wavered. You have to be sure of your opinion before you give it, and he wasn't sure because he wasn't sure if he was trying to be funny or serious, and neither was anybody else.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maher made his living off of crap like this and he got burned. He's so busy burning everyone else in effigy he whines like a pansy when the tables turn? What bullshit.
If Maher can't think of the right thing to say then he's lost his purpose.
Who owed Maher a television show? I don't see "Corporations shall not infringe on your right to have your own television show" in the bill of rights.
[quote]<strong>but the rest of his pro-Americana critics have failed in roughly the same way and their reaction has been at least as embarrasing as Maher's comedic or editorial failings.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Howso?
<strong>The immediate reaction of America was to paint these criminals as cowards. So very trite, so self servingly propagandist, but so very true.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just goes to show that bravery and goodness are not in any way linked, just like criminality and cowardice aren't. Congratulations, you're a brave man, just an evil criminal, corrupt to the core of your hateful being.
The scale and the impact of 9-11 has not been equalled in American history, it was something new for the American citizen. Kamikaze is a different beast. Those were soldiers at war with other soldiers. The pressures put on them to preform their 'duty' (most of them young boys) was , I'd venture a guess, deployed against a much greater will to survive. Ghastly, but a little different than situation of the suicide pilots of 9-11 or the bombers of Isreal.
Eternal life? yes yes yes, I see the argument completely, I agree with it, but we suffer what they do in this life. It doesn't matter to me that they are victims of their own psychology. I would rather confine my thinking to this realm, and in this realm Americans are faced with a very new threat. Platitudes about bravery and morality etc etc mean very little to me.
Domestically, those platitudes are what you have been offered in the place of real action. It should worry you (Americans) but it generally does not. Twice that I can think of, BUsh has urged peope to fly? Once almost immeadiately after 9-11. Why should we "do as we have done"? You can get on a human missile if you want, I think I'll avoid tall buildings, thanks. Security? The failings, gross failings, of the airline industry have been comletely glossed over in the time since 9-11. Even victim compensation stipulates that one waive all future legal action against the airline industry. Why? So we can go on as we have always done? Because they're cowards and we're not? That is poor, and dangerous, rationale, and it repeats itself everywhere. Security at major events is again become nothing more than a token gesture, and the stamina to maintain rigorous control of immigration and naturalization is already fading.
What Maher said was not well though out, but I choose to give it its best possible light. There is a frightening collision between truth and propaganda at work, or there was, and it was hard to see for most because the essential argument was true, they are cowards, but was deployed -- unconsciously, I hope -- as a defence mechanism. We do not need psychological defence, we need real defence.
<strong>There is nothing new about suicide killers...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah. I don't think anybody was laboring under that illusion.
[quote]<strong>Bravery is acting to help others without thought for yourself; their entire motivation was selfish. *They* get to kill the infidel and *they* get to go to heaven and get virgins for eternity.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
True, but it's one thing to believe that. It's another thing to act on that belief. It doesn't lessen my utter contempt for the 9/11 terrorists just because I withhold from using one particular insult against them.
it certainly wasn't perfect an bill maher definitely has his hang ups but it was one of very few shows that i actually found memorable.
<strong>politically incorrect was a watershed mark in recent broadcasting history. it brought real discussion of real topics into real americans living rooms in the only way that is digestible to the masses, with a bit of a humor.
it certainly wasn't perfect an bill maher definitely has his hang ups but it was one of very few shows that i actually found memorable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it didn't. It brought yet more phonies in front of the cameras to talk about things they know little about.
[I heard] more intelligent questions and dead-on biting commentary from Dennis Miller on HBO (pick any three episodes) than the two dozen or more Politically Incorrect shows I watched over the years. Maher's mistake was that he let too many backwards ass people onto his show so he would have someone to lampoon all the time. It wreaked of a setup.
Instead, he should've just had one intelligent guest who could speak to the issues one way or another. Whether Maher agreed with him / her or not.
Maher's [show] was useless IMO.
[ 11-03-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>